A comparison between acoustic output indices in 2D and 3D/4D ultrasound in obstetrics

39Citations
Citations of this article
49Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: Three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound is gaining popularity in prenatal diagnosis. While there are no studies regarding the safety of 3D ultrasound, it is now widely performed in non-medical facilities, for non-diagnostic purposes. The present study was aimed at comparing the acoustic output, as expressed by thermal index (TI) and mechanical index (MI), of conventional two-dimensional (2D) and 3D/4D ultrasound during pregnancy. Methods: A prospective, observational study was conducted, using three different commercially available machines (iU22, Philips Medical Systems; Prosound Alfa-10, Aloka; and Voluson 730 Expert, General Electric). Patients undergoing additional 3D/4D ultrasound examinations were recruited from those scheduled for fetal anatomy and follow-up exams. Fetuses with anomalies were excluded from the analysis. Data were collected regarding duration of the exam, and each MI and TI during 2D and 3D/4D ultrasound exams. Results: A total of 40 ultrasound examinations were evaluated. Mean gestational age was 31.1 ± 5.8 weeks, and mean duration of the exam was 20.1 ± 9.9 min. Mean Tls during the 3D (0.27 ± 0.1) and 4D examinations (0.24 ± 0.1) were comparable with the TI during B-mode scanning (0.28 ± 0.1, P = 0.343). The MIs during the 3D volume acquisitions were significantly lower than those in the 2D B-mode ultrasound studies (0.89 ± 0.2 vs. 1.12 ± 0.1, P = 0.018). The 3D volume acquisitions added 2.0 ± 1.8 min of actual ultrasound scanning time (i.e. not including data processing and manipulation, or 3D displays, which are all post-processing steps). The 4D added 2.2 ± 1.2 min. Conclusions: Acoustic exposure levels during 3D/4D ultrasound examination, as expressed by TI, are comparable with those of 2D B-mode ultrasound. However, it is very difficult to evaluate the additional scanning time needed to choose an adequate scanning plane and to acquire a diagnostic 3D volume. Copyright © 2007 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sheiner, E., Hackmon, R., Shoham-Vardi, I., Pombar, X., Hussey, M. J., Strassner, H. T., & Abramowicz, J. S. (2007). A comparison between acoustic output indices in 2D and 3D/4D ultrasound in obstetrics. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 29(3), 326–328. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.3933

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free